> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/2010/12/25/the-decline-of-the-west-again/
Nathan, I am in complete agreement with your analysis on this (which
is a good thing since you are smart in these things and I'm not),
except for one aspect.
I believe that in the grand scheme of things, China, for about the
last 150 years was in a non-normal state of affairs. This isn't the
first time that China has been rising up to the top as an economic,
military and societal powerhouse. From a scientific perspective,
they've also had a very very rich scientific history. I believe that
our recent (last couple hundred years) history shows China on the low
side of its rise-fall cycles. This is a country that within that time
period tore itself apart from the inside-out. The Communist
Revolution, succeeded there for very specific reasons. I won't get
into the positives/negatives of this, but it was successful for
reasons that other systems failed or would have failed. Yet, the "DNA"
(or whatever else it might be) of the Chinese people comes through in
the end.
I see India as China plus 20 years. But there are other countries in
SE Asia which have experienced tremendous growth/success in the past
50 years, but these are recent successes based on recent leadership
and corporate view, and not necessarily something that is indwelt to
the culture. Dubai is an example of this. (not technically in SE Asia,
but a perfect poster-child example). As quickly as Dubai rose, as
quickly it threatens to fall. Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan,
Singapore, are examples of tremendous recent history success that
aren't necessarily based on a cultural history of that success. Other
countries have risen, topped out and are struggling with
self-identity, such as Indonesia. This is not a new phenomenon.
Venice, Rome, Alexandria, Athens, etc., were all highly successful
places and sometimes for many hundreds of years. But, we just need to
look at places like London or Hong Kong, or Beijing or even Tehran to
see where seats of power have remained seats of power (economically,
scientifically, militarily and societal) for extremely long periods of
time. I didn't mention the USA in this because our history is much
shorter and our rise to "world super power" or "empire" is only a few
decades old. A mere flash-in-the-pan in the annals of world history.
In a few hundred years, I suspect that "English" will be a very minor
language--if it even exists.
In the end, I think it really comes down to who controls the
trade-routes. Having natural resources is good for a generation or
two, but once those resources are done being exploited, you end up
with holes in the ground and poverty to those who remain. The USA has
rarely, even during this current "empire" mode, had control over
trade-routes. (Well, it has, but not to the benefit of USA interests).
Even while Europe struggles with cultural and societal issues, the
majority of the global trade routes are controlled by Europeans. I
also see China controlling or influencing many trade routes too.
India? No. Japan? No. South Korea? No. Taiwan? No.
The long-term rise of a nation is dependent upon control of the trade
routes. Nations rise and fall based on resources or other external
influences, but without control of the trade routes, they will always
be subject to the whims of other nations.
AG (smoke blowing out my hat) Schnozz
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|